Tag: R (Miller) and Others v The Prime Minister (Miller 2)
-
Steven Spadijer: Miller No 2: Orthodoxy as Heresy, Heresy as Orthodoxy
Introduction Reading the recent Miller No. 2 decision you would be forgiven in thinking that Boris Johnson had the chutzpah to advise the Queen to unilaterally decree a whole range of new criminal offences (Proclamations) – all under the guise of the prorogation power. Indeed, the Miller No. 2 decision paints itself as pure orthodoxy.…
-
Anne Twomey: Article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688 and Its Application to Prorogation
In the wake of Miller (No 2), it has been contended in the media that prorogation ‘has always been treated as a “proceeding in Parliament”’ and hence protected from judicial review by article 9 of the Bill of Rights 1688. The allegation is that in Miller (No 2), the Supreme Court overturned over 300 years…
-
Anthony Arnull: Is the UK Supreme Court Pro-EU?
Of all the criticisms levelled by elements of the press and others at the judgment of the Supreme Court in Miller II and Cherry, perhaps the least convincing is that the Justices are pro-EU. It has been widely pointed out that we have no idea whether, and if so how, the Justices voted in the…
-
Michael Detmold: The Monarch in the Room
(Let’s be clear. Why is an Australian constitutional lawyer writing about the UK Constitution? It’s simple. She’s our Queen, too.) The Court in Miller/Cherry (at 35) distinguished between the question ‘whether a prerogative power exists’ and ‘whether, granted that a prerogative power exists, and that it has been exercised within its limits, the exercise of…
-
Theodore Konstadinides, Noreen O’Meara and Riccardo Sallustio: The UK Supreme Court’s Judgment in Miller/Cherry: Reflections on Its Context and Implications
On 24 September, the UK Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Prime Minister’s advice to prorogue Parliament was unlawful, and that the resulting Order in Council and subsequent prorogation were ‘null, void and of no effect’. The litigation on the justiciability of prorogation and the lawfulness of the Prime Ministerial advice has led to one…
-
Alexandra Sinclair and Joe Tomlinson: Making Parliamentary Accountability Effective: Prorogation, No Deal Brexit, and Statutory Instruments (Part 3)
Unless you have been living in a nuclear bunker, you will know that the UK Supreme Court held in R (on the Application of Miller) v The Prime Minister that the decision to prorogue Parliament was unlawful. This was because the prorogation had the effect of ‘preventing, without reasonable justification, the ability of Parliament to…
-
Anurag Deb: A Constitution of Principles: From Miller to Minerva Mills
Introduction In a succinct and surprisingly unanimous judgment in Miller and Cherry [2019] UKSC 41 the UK Supreme Court delivered an unprecedented rebuke to the Prime Minister in deciding that he had not shown “any reason – let alone a good reason” to advise the Queen to prorogue Parliament, ruling that the prorogation was unlawful,…
-
Aris Georgopoulos: The Melting of Constitutional “Glaciers”: Miller 2 and the Prerogative Powers of Government
The purpose of this piece is to examine the legal and constitutional implications of the Miller 2 Judgment. I will focus on two aspects of the Judgment. First, the reasoning of the Court in setting and applying the standard for examining the five-week prorogation’s impact. Second, the Court’s approach concerning the examination of the reasons…
-
Mike Gordon: The Prorogation Case and the Political Constitution
The decision of the Supreme Court in Cherry / Miller (No.2) [2019] UKSC 41 has been heralded as a significant moment in our constitutional history, a case which will be regarded as a defining part of the fabric of our constitution for centuries to come. Whether it will live up to this billing is a…
-
Lorne Neudorf: The Constitutional Position of Delegated Legislation after Cherry/Miller (No 2)
Following the highly anticipated decision of the UK Supreme Court in Cherry/Miller (No 2), commentators have weighed in on some of the implications of this ground-breaking judgment. This post considers what the judgment has to say about the constitutional position of delegated legislation. Delegated legislation matters. Over time, it has become the most significant source…